kkp

I was using iris for updates on my claim until nov. 06 when I changed e-mail servers. I lost my thread with them and couldn't re-establish it My last contact with them stated my iu claim was under review and My appeal on ptsd which is two years old and a nod on My rt. klnee couldn't be considered until the iu was resolved . after losing my thread with them, I called the ro the middle of dec. 06. I was told (and he said i'm reading from the computer) Your file is before the appeal team. I told him what I had been hearing before, and he said all I can tell you is whats on the computer. I called back after christmas and was told the exact same thing. When I asked about the iu being decided first, He said your file can only be at one place at a time and its in appeals. Well I re-established contact through iris again today and guess what, I was given a canned quote I had been getting all along before. Your iu has to be looked at first, the approx. time is about 254 days, and so on. Which one of these dammed liars am I supposed to believe. P____________ off kkp

I have a friend who spent three years in the Army, and twenty years in the seabees as an equipment operater. After his retirement from the Military He retired from a civil service job as a truck driver. We have recently had a debate on his hearing loss. His hearing loss is signifigant from the time he joined the army to the time of his discharge from the Navy. I suggested he file a claim with the va for his hearing loss. He insist that his civil service job retirement would disqualify him from any disablity benifits from the military. I personnally think He should file a claim for his hearing loss and get hearing aids ( He's wearing an older pair of mine at the present I have to admit I dont know about any disability in a case like this. It seems to me he would qualify however I know the congress has been debating what they call double dipping of late. ( I know for a fact it's alright for our senators and congressmen to have three or four federal retirements, but an old fart like him as he refers to himself, I don't know.) I feel he would be eligible for hearing aids, and perhaps disability, But I am pretty dumb in these matters as some of you know from other post I have made. I would love to have some of your opinions as to what He should do. Thanks alot kkp

Berta I tried the address you gave Me earlier, but this new yahoo mail beta I,m using kicks it back and insists I have--user@example--type address. I just took the address I typed in off and entered your's just in case I had made a mistake and it did the same thing. I may have to go back to outlook_mail. I changed my server from cable to verizon and someway I put an automatic swich to yahoo which has been alright to this point. I,m not the sharpest knife in the drawer when it comes to computers. thanks KKP

I recently changed email address's, and also lost the email thread I had with iris. Could someone please give me the address again. thanks kkp

Berta I don't know what a vcaa letter so I can't answer that. It seems he did say they would look at my appeal and see I needed to send anything else. Thanks kkp

I have an appeal for ptsd that will be two years old in feb. 07. (50%- 70%). I have a nod on a rt. knee injury, I filed seven months ago. I filed for IU about six months ago. I also have a claim for tennitis. meniers, and vertigo prepared and ready to file. ( A strong case documented from service to date.) When asked why I hadn't filed before, It's simple. I never knew I had a case until I filed for ptsd, AND JOINED THIS FORUM where I was encouraged to get a copy of My medical records. They clearly showed I had significant hearing loss while in service. So I have a stack of medicals a 1/2 thick to send with that claim when I file. I talked to the RO just before the holidays and he said my claim was before the hearing review board but no decision had been made. I called back today to confirm what I was told prior to the holidays. He told me the same thing. I told him that every time I had called about my case up to this point, I was told a decision had to be made on th IU before it would be sent to the the appeal board. I ask him what had changed to reverse the process. His reply was that my file could only be at one place at a time, since I only have one file. When I questioned him further, He said thats just the way they were handling my case. I dont know if this is good news or just news. Also I don't know if I should file on my hearing now. If they are nearing a decision, a new claim could set it back, or would it. I could really use some advice on what You guys think is going on with my case, and what I should do regarding the hearing claim. thant kkp

I have an appeal for ptsd that will be two years old in feb. 07.

Today they told Me My appeal on the ptsd, and the NOD on my right knee was before the review board. Since this is different from what they have been telling me, I told him what they had been saying about the IU claim. He just confirmed what He had already told me. The ptsd appeal is about two years, the NOD on the right knee about three months, and the claim for IU about two and one half months. Is the review board the same as the appeal team, that seems to be where my c file is at present. I really don't understand the process the ro uses. Instead of the iu having to be decided first, it's suddenly at the review board.

I just called the Huntington ro to get an update on My claim. For the past several months they keep telling Me the same thing, That a decision has to be made on my IU claim before My appeal on My 50% ptsd, and an NOD on My right knee can be considered. Today they told Me My appeal on the ptsd, and the NOD on my right knee was before the review board. Since this is different from what they have been telling me, I told him what they had been saying about the IU claim. He just confirmed what He had already told me. The ptsd appeal is about two years, the NOD on the right knee about three months, and the claim for IU about two and one half months. I’m wondering what some of your thoughts are. Also I have a new claim for hearing loss, tinnitus, vertigo, and menier’s ready to file, and I am wondering if I should hold off and see what happens with this. Thanks in advance as always kkp

I have a stack of documentation about a 1/2 thick from 1980 to date. The Doctor who theated me befor that has died and I can't get their records. Should I use this IMO and all the docmentation I have and go ahead and file. Below is a rewritten copy of the IMO. As most of you know, I have an appeal for PTSD that is being held up already due to an NOD on my knee and a new claim for IU. Please give me your opinion as to whether I should go ahead and file this hearing claim or not. "Mr. ___has hearing loss, tinnitus and vertigo. Fact: Mr. ___complained of hearing loss while actively srving in the military as evidenced by his records in May, 1963. Fact: Mr. ____ first complained of dizziness after 1 month in the military during an exam 20 September 1962. Fact: Mr.____ exhibited hearing loss at his separation examination. Fact: Mr. ___ was exposed to noise while in the Army at lvels that could cause hearing loss. Fact: Mr.___was diagnosed with Meniere's disease with symptoms dating back to the Army. Fact: Mr. ___ hearing loss has continued to decrease as evidenced by his audiograms which is consistent with Meniere's disease. It is highly probable to this claim of the nexus between service and his current medical condition. In my opinion, the currently existing medical conditions of hearing loss, vertig, tinnitus and diagnosed Meniere's disease are related to an injury, disease or event occurring during th veteran's military service." Entered by ___ ___ ____, M.A.,CCC-A

Thanks for all the input. I think adoption is the key word in My situation. I will talk to his mother and go from their. thanks again and merry Christmas to all. KKp

Thanks Jargin I sure hope it works out for you and your Son, as You also sound like a good parent. I will be sure to keep the topic alive when I see Berta or some of the others on line. Berta does seem quite knowledgeable on some of the threads that I have read of hers. Merry Christmas! kkp

Jangrin Thats great news. My Wife and I do love the Boy with all our hearts . He's a fine young Man and he's a junior in high School. Also he is above average in athletics whit a possibiliy of a scholarship. I wonder how much a student gets under Chapter 35 a year. This is somethiing totally new to me. At the present time we have legal guardianship and have had since he was four years old Would it be better if it is an official adoption? We just never seen the need to adopt before. Thanks. kkp

Does any one know if an adopted child is eligible for chapter thirty 35 If I win my IU claim, would my adopted Grandson of one year qualify' thanks kkp

Berta they did the test without the hearing aids And I didn't ask if they would write me a letter They did do a complete audio with decibals, How ever when I went to records I only recieved their report. I called the adio department this morning, and was advised I need to request the actual grafts from records, so I will go back and get it this afternoon. I didn't asked them if they would write me a letter. I just took My final pysicial report from the military and showed them and ask if I should file a claim. Two of them confired and told me I should definatily file a claim due to the amount of hearing I lost while I was in the Army. I have an appoinment with an audioligist, who Is a friend, and she used to do c&p exams for the va before they opened their own department at the VA. I have lots of records from through the years, She asked if I would bring everything I have tommorow, And She will give me an exam there and write me an IMO to send with My claim, I made copies of the forms, one on ear disease, the other on audio that, You had posted that explain what the va requires. I expect She already knows how, but I'll take them anyway. Whats your thought on wether I should file now or wait for a decision on the IU. In short I have an appeal on ptsd and one on my rt knee on hold until a decision is made onthe IU. Would a knew claim clogged my case more or not. Thanks as always kkp

Cavman I havn" talked to anyone abut My appeal on ptsd for a couple of weeks, but was told then it was on hold until a decision was made on My pending IU claim. kkp

Thanks for all your responces. I didn't get a letter from the audioligist that did my test for hearng aids. I just droped in and showed them my hearing test on entry and discharge. There was a signifgant loss in the three years. I was a machine gunner. I will ask her if she would write me a letter, as she and another person there said I should file a claim. Here is Her last report I got from hosp records. It's French to me, but maybe someone else can tell me If I should file. All I know is, I can't hear worth a hoot. Patien recieved full audiological evaluation. The case history review revealed a mild progressing to profound sensorineural hearing loss AS and normal hearing progression to a moderate severe sesorineural hearing loss AD. Speech reception thresholds were in agreement with pure tone findings. Speech discrimination scores were fair AS and good AD. MCL'S were 80dbhl AS and 60 dbhl AD. UCL'S were 100dbhl AS and 100+dbhl AD Immitance testing revealed type A tympanograms AU. Ipsilateral acustics reflexes were elevated to no responce AU. Otoscopy revealed slight cerumen AU. Impression: Bilateral amplification I also have alot of documentation going back to 1980. for severe vertigo and tennitus. any thoughts thanks kkp

I took my seperation physicl papers by the audiodolgy department at the va friday and showed it to the the Lady that tested My hearing for my last hearing aids. She and another person that worked there both agreed I had enough hear loss during my enlistment that I should file a claim. I also have suffered from severe vertigo since 1980, and tinnius. This is all well documented many times over.I also was dianosed with meneres diesease a few years ago at the va. , and see a specialist at the va for all of the above. My question is should I file a claim now or wait. I have a n appeal for ptsd, presently 50%, an appeal on My rt. knee, and aclaim for IU, thats been filed for about 4 months now. The IU claim has the appeals held up until a decision is made it. Should I hold off on filing on my hearing,( i'm leaning in that direction) or go ahead and file. I need some of the excellant advice I know I can get here thanks a million. kkp

I don't doubt a thing you've said. I have fought two major battles, one with ssa, and one with workers comp. I hired a lawyer who filed my legal stuff but in all honesty I did all the leg work. I won both. Proably the worst thing the va can do is low ball a vet. I know some dont have the resources, in various ways. But some old crippled up vets that still have their minds can be more lethal to the va than a Squad of Green Berets were to charlie. GO TEAM KKP

Berta I agree it would take lawyers awhile to handle va cases. I bought some furnisher in July of 2005. I wrote a check for $5600.00, and the furniture was suppose to be delivered in three weeks. After weekly calls for three months, I finally turned it over to a Lawyer. In the suit I made him include mental anguish. He said we were waisting our time because the wu supreme had ruled on a case not long ago that it would be hard to proove. He relunctantly included it in the suit. At my deposintion from their lawyer they also said this wouldn't fly. I insisted it would because I suffered from ptsd, and it worsened my condition. They wanted to settle by giving My money back. I told them to stick it where the sun didnt shine, and demanded a trial by jury. Neither My Lawyer or the Big law firm that handled the furniture companies side had ever heard of ptsd. I guantee when I threw my file on the table it got some attention. It took a year from the time of purchase to a court date. Up to this point they had only used a jr. Lawyer in their defense, but I'm here to tell you on trial day they bought their big guns out. Three in fact, My Wife was really nervous and so was My Lawyer, but I just set there and grin at them. I wanted a trial by jury because thats the only way I could claim punitive damages, And brother did I have a number ready for them when it got to that point. Just before jury selection began their Lawyer requested a delay, and the Judge agreed to allow it. Within a few days they made us an offer, but by this time I wanted the fight. The offer they made was a tidy sum.,and My Lawyer wanted to take it. Needless to say I was irate. Because I knew I was going to win this case and I wanted punitive damages. After a few days when I could think straight again I realized How much this was affecting My Wife and decided to take the settlment. I guess My point is I agree It would take Lawyers awhile but they would educate themselves in va law after a while especially when they started seeing the dollar signs. And by the way if it does become law and I need a Lawyer. I would go to my opposing council as I am sure they have a head start on ptsd (at least)HEE HEE. KKP

Stretch The graft they used on me went left ear 500= 10 1000=10 2000=35 3000=35 4000=40 5000=40 6000=40 8000=40. thanks for your input.

I see when I posted this the numbers didn't line up. the first 10 should be under 500 and so on. Sometimes these computers are tooooo smart.

I wear hearing aides in both ears. about 80% loss left ear, about 50% right ear, and vertigo nearly all the time. I have read alot on hadit on this subject, so pulled My medical records and they do have hearing testing on them. I can see there was some loss of hearing during my tour. My scanner is broken so I will type them out and see if It's enough loss to file a claim. I don't have all my medical records but do have one instance where I went to the clinic twice. complaining of my hearing. The first time they cleaned my ears, and went back in two days and was pronounced healed. Maybe someone can tell me if I should file a claim. The va does furnish my hearing aides since I am 50% ptsd. 500 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 R 10 10 10 / 15 / / L 10 10 20 / 30 / / The numbers above is when I went in. below when I got out R 10 10 10 / 15 / / L 10 10 35 / 40 / / kkp

I know for many of you Vets, the Viet Nam war started in 1964. How-be-it, Many of us know from experance it started long befor then, But thats another topic for another day. I have done alot of research trying to reconstruct events of my own expearances. AO (Defoliants) was used as early as 1960 in Laos and parts of Viet Nam, maybe earlier But I can document the war and ao use from 1960 on. At any rate heres a little tid bit. At worst its a good read kkp 5. Diem gravely concerned over deterioration situation southern Laos in recent months and would of course like to see action taken to clean up that area. Any decision on part of GVN to throw sizable force into this effort would be grave one not only because it would represent broadening of war in which GVN now engaged but because of limited available GVN forces to meet current military needs. Believe however that GVN would seriously consider as part cooperative effort commitment some additional forces beyond small number of Vietnamese Special Forces and regulars now engaged in Laos and along Lao border. GVN officials continue to talk in admiring and favorable terms about use of Pakistani troops in Laos, but we are not in position judge practicality of this idea. Diem might not insist upon actual involvement of US combat forces at outset of cooperative action in Laos but would certainly seek to obtain clear commitment by US to send in combat forces if need developed. GVN operations Laos tactically and strategically sound and desirable. Due guerrilla war now going on in Viet Nam GVN military forces immediately available for cooperative action in Laos could probably consist only additional small units somewhat similar those now in Laos (principally along route 9) but with perhaps broader role, possibly to include limited combat support of Lao units. GVN might as calculated risk commit larger forces to Laos with view toward preventing intensified future VC infiltration through Laos, but sizable GVN operation in Laos could probably be considered only within time frame required to mobilize, train and equip additional forces now planned but not yet available. Forces being added under 30,000 increase will provide additional capability but these not available in significant numbers before late 1962. Should be recognized that, if the above occurs, there is possibility that increased enemy action will force GVN to escalate its forces committed across Lao border beyond whatever level it originally decides-e.g., small to sizable. In latter case it important it be kept in mind that additional 30,000 increment is required for GVN primary task of defeating insurgency within Viet Nam at approximately its present intensity. Bangkok and Vientiane much better qualified than me to comment on likelihood Sarit and Phoumi cooperation in cleanup southern Laos. From Saigon it would appear that Phoumi could be persuaded without much trouble as we believe there is inclination on his part at times to throw in towel re northern Laos, withdraw his forces to south and attempt set up separate government there. Phoumi would probably regard cooperative effort in southern Laos as at least giving him greater assurance of being able hold out there if he is obliged give up north. Would appear to US Sarit might be harder to convince that southern Laos should have priority as against occupying all parts of Laos adjacent to Mekong and thus bordering Thailand. We would assume if enough outside support thrown in (e.g., Pakistani troops) to conduct both operations, Sarit would willingly cooperate on southern Laos operation as well. Above is based on my understanding first question under five refers to cooperative action just as remaining two questions do. If, however, first question stands alone and refers to unilateral GVN troop employment in eastern Laos for primary purpose defense South Viet Nam, then our response is: With respect infiltration individuals or small groups VC, GVN troops not now capable with or without pushing out into Laos controlling very numerous rugged and forested infiltration points which occur entire length all borders here. Military forces required for high degree control infiltration type described above would be prohibitive regardless location of troops. On other hand for control any sizable communist troop units or supply routes GVN forces located Laos on major avenues of approach and commanding terrain worthy consideration. This for purposes early warning and desirability meeting enemy ahead of own borders plus additional indication determination stop aggression. Extent GVN troop commitment for this purpose would be governed by essentially same factors as those outlined above with respect to cooperative action in Laos. Presently RVNAF are studying MAAG recommended techniques to reduce infiltration such as defoliant, change from present static guard posts to mobile concept involving additional patrols including dogs, establishment of buffer population, additional roads and air fields and like, which are long range in nature and cannot be expected to stop but only progressively reduce infiltration. Nolting 121. Editorial Note The Conclusions of National Intelligence Estimate 14.3/53-61, August 15, 1961, entitled "Prospects for North and South Vietnam", are printed in United States-Vietnam Relations, 1945-1967, Book 11, pages 245-246. 122. Editorial Note On August 17, 1961, William J. Jorden, a former New York Times correspondent who became a member of the Department of State's Policy Planning Council earlier in the month, left the United States for a fact-finding mission to South Vietnam. His task was to gather documentation on infiltration by North Vietnamese forces into the South. In a letter of August 17 to Ambassador Nolting, Vietnam Task Force Director Sterling J. Cottrell wrote that Jorden had only learned of his assignment the previous week and the suggestion that he be sent had been approved by the President within 24 hours. Cottrell described Jorden as "soft-spoken and willing to listen" and added: "He is extremely serious about this undertaking and realizes that the material which he is able to assemble with your help and write up is likely to have a considerable influence on U.S. policy decisions. He is also prepared for the fact that he may not be able to obtain enough evidence to make a fully impressive case." (Department of State, Vietnam Working Group Files: Lot 66 D 193, VN 1961 Presidential Program Psychological TF 26 thru 31) 123. Memorandum From the Joint Chiefs of Staff to the Secretary of Defense (McNamara)/1/ JCSM-583-61 Washington, August 24, 1961.

From Colonel Dan Cedusky email: WASHINGTON - A bill mandating tougher punishment for military imposters gained final approval from the House on Wednesday, and will now go to the president to be signed into law. It's amazing to me how subjects can be distorted from there original meaning. If you'll look above you'll notice it says Military imposter. not combat imposters. I'm here to tell you if you served on a ship delivering supplies or any other support groop, or was in the military during this era or any other era of war. YOU ARE A WAR ERA VETERAN. Those who might have short memories may remember there were other hot spots in the world at the same time as nam. My brother served in Germany the same time I was in South East Asia, Why ; because thats where his orders said he should go. While we were where we were, doing what our orders said, He was in Germany holding the Soviets at bay. remember( Gorby tear down this wall) If his orders said go to Nam, He would have went, and possably came home in a body bag, crippled, or who knows maybe even a Hero with a silver star. (I SUGGEST WE QUIT EATING OUR OWN AND REMMEMBER) SOME WERE CALLED, SOME WERE SENT, AND SOME JUST PACKED THEIR BAGS AND WENT TO CANADA. I think these latter ones and those who didn't serve, but pretend now that they did are the ones this bill was directed at. There may be a few vets that exagerate there statis, and it may not be right, but even that dosn't take away the fact they are VETERANS